Hopefully the rest of the EOS range won't follow suit switching to SD, 'cos I don't really want to replace my existing CF kit, 'cos that'll be expensive!

If you're going to change your camera, the cost of new memory cards is negligible in comparison. The fastest, 2 gig Sandisk non-SDHC SD card (which is faster than a lot of the new SDHC cards) can be had for less than £15 online.

Anyway, your old CF cards won't be made redundant 'cos they'll still work with your old kit!

Now, you can buy 16 or 32 Gb CF (look for the Transcend Compact Flash card 32GB, part number TS32GCF133). I don't see any SD this big. If I want to use the RAW format, it take more than 2 Gb when I go in vacation for 2 or 3 weeks.

For now I have 2 CF of 8 Gb and and 2 CF of 4 Gb, I yould like to reuse them if I upgrade my camera.

In other camera, Canon provide 2 slot for CF & SD, why not for the EOS 450D.

So no 450D for me...

The theoretical limit of SDHC is 128 Gb, so max size is not an issue. 32 Gb SDHC cards are going to be out very soon. I personally wouldn't go above 4 Gb because that's already an awful lot of photos to lose if your card becomes corrupt.

Ultimately though, SD cards are smaller, lighter and cheaper to manufacture, so it's obvious why Canon are moving towards that format and discontinuing their support for CF. Once again, I'll restate, SD cards are cheap as chips and will continue to get cheaper, so if you're paying £1000+ for a D-SLR body quit whinging and stump up the extra £10-20 for a new memory card! It really is like buying a Ferrari and moaning about insurance and fuel consumption.

At the end of the article we can read “The EOS 450D body only is priced at £599.99 (€899.99), the inclusion of a 18-55mm kit will cost £679.99 (€999.99).”

So it would be £599.99 instead of £1000 to replace the EOS 350D by a EOS 450D.

Let me do a little calculation:

To replace 2 CF of 8 GB and 2 CF of 4 GB I will need 12 SD of 2 GB at £15 it is £180.

That is 30% of the price of the EOS 450D, I don’t call it cheap…

Let do other calculation: A JPG file is around 3 MB, if you save it in RAW as well as JPG it is around 7 MB (3MB for the JPG + 4MB for the RAW). Now, I use the “Exposure bracketing” so each time I push the trigger, 3 pictures are taken. That is 21 MB for each photos set.

8 GB / 21 MB = 380 Photos.

2 GG / 21 MG = 95 Photos.

Yes, they are smaller but if you need 12 SD instead of 4 CF you don’t gain anything.

So just one SD of 2 GB is cheap, but if you want to use the RAW and the bracketing it is not enough. And I already have the CF, I don’t want to throw them away.

It seems like no time at all since I bought my 350D which was replaced very soon after by the 400D. Now the 400D is "outdated". Give me my trusty G3 any day...

Anonymous Coward: "The theoretical limit of SDHC is 128 Gb, so max size is not an issue. 32 Gb SDHC cards are going to be out very soon"

-

If it's already at 32GB, then how is a limit of 128Gb (a mere 4 times the current offering) not an issue?

As the folklore tale goes .... "640k should be enough for anyone"

Re: SD

Not an issue to Germain, since he was under the mistaken impression that SD cards couldn't match the size of the current CF cards (16-32 Gb). Anyway, by the time the 128 Gb limit is reached there'll be another standard out, with a larger limit. When that happens we can look forward to all the people with SD cards moaning about manufacturers that no longer build SD slots into their devices!

Re: CF vs. SD

Upgrading from a 350D to a 450D seems a bit pointless - they're just different generations of Canon's entry level D-SLR. Hence my assumption that you'd be spending a little more cash i.e. circa £1000. Also, your calculations ignore the fact that SD cards come in sizes larger than 2 Gb, and that the larger ones have a lower per Gb cost.

:-(

Paris won't be happy